Channel Migrants (Admin advisory. Contains disturbing image and repulsive views)

UKLL1981 said:
Nope but at the same time I wouldn’t risk my sons life by travelling through dozens of countries and across thousands of miles of land, borders and water. Is France not a safe country and does persecution and harm suddenly end when they cross the channel?

The more you take in, the more you help and the more you give shelter and aid to, then the more you will encourage to come here and the more will die trying to achieve it.

Anyone that chooses to travel through and leave safe countries like France in order to get to the U.K. is a economic migrant, this is illegal immigration that costs lives and only benefits criminals.

How many migrant camps do we have in this country? It’s the last stop and the holy grail for economic migrants. We aren’t returning them all and we aren’t housing them in camps like other countries so why do you think they keep trying to come here? If we did house them in camps like France they wouldn’t be so keen to risk their lives to get here. The only way you are going to stop people dying is to stop giving them the incentive to get to the U.K. by travelling half way round the world and leaving safe counties.
Click to expand...

you’ll never walk a day in their shoes, you wouldn’t know what you would or wouldn’t risk.

your white privilege shines through
 
Facefuzz said:
I’m actually in the keep them in their own country brigade. Spend the money on policing immigration, social housing, social care on foreign aid. Help them rebuild.

I like the idea of some kind of immigration centre at the Cypriot airbase where decisions can be made before people travel to Italy France Spain and then the south coast.

You see by not controlling it properly you play into the hands of racists. It bites you on the **** twice.

I did vote brexit. A lot was based on immigration but not primarily.

I can’t see why people wouldn’t want Controlled immigration and the end of illegal immigration. There 2 different things aren’t they?
Click to expand...
Keep them in Syria? How do we police this? I don‘t think Turkey will be too happy with UK immigration setting up shop there
 
HarryVegas said:
Here's one of those Syrian asylum seekers. Risked everything to come here, lost family members, landed up in the Boro, where he studied at our great university. Now living in London and a nationally recognised and celebrated poet (also my friend, but you can't have everything). Wouldn't be here at all if certain posters had their way.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/proletarianpoetry.com/2015/11/11/sorry-by-amir-darwish/amp/
Click to expand...


Great poetic interlude in all this shouting. Thank you.
 
Facefuzz said:
I can’t see why people wouldn’t want Controlled immigration and the end of illegal immigration. There 2 different things aren’t they?
Click to expand...
"I can’t see why people wouldn’t want Controlled immigration and the end of illegal immigration. There 2 different things aren’t they? "
This is exactly what people want. But how can you tell someone is an illegal immigrant without processing them first? You cannot process them in a dinghy in the middle of the sea so they must be allowed to land so that they CAN be processed.
 
Trug said:
"I can’t see why people wouldn’t want Controlled immigration and the end of illegal immigration. There 2 different things aren’t they? "
This is exactly what people want. But how can you tell someone is an illegal immigrant without processing them first? You cannot process them in a dinghy in the middle of the sea so they must be allowed to land so that they CAN be processed.
Click to expand...
Course they should be allowed to land as any civilised country would do. And any one has the right to claim asylum. If they are turned down, that doesn't make them an illegal immigrant.
 
red_harrington said:
They are not pieces of ****, they are parents who love their kids just like you and me.

The fact that they are so desperate to leave their country while putting themselves and their children at risk shows exactly the horrific pressure and grim circumstances they are living under.

Can't you see that?
Click to expand...
He lives in Trump country - QED.
 
I suggest, instead of us giving the French million of pounds to do a job it is not in their interests to do. Let our border force agents set up on the French side to stop the migrant at source.........Not a chance in hell. The French are being paid for SFA. And bye the way I feel sorry for the French. They are in a a no win situation
 
I don't think there are many people that are saying we shouldn't accept asylum seekers or refugees. The problem is people sailing here in dinghys from a safe country. It's dangerous and unnecessary because they are already in a safe country where they can seek asylum. Why would anyone defend this for any reason other than virtue signaling? I don't mean defend asylum seekers or how it enriches our culture, or it benefits us economically, I mean "Why is it acceptable that we have people fleeing a safe, civilised country to enter our country illegally?"

If they've already been denied by France then 100% we shouldn't be accepting them because France will have a similar criteria to us. Economic migrants shouldn't be treated as special cases just because they came by dinghy instead of plane. A dinghy from France and a dinghy from Syria are very different situations.

We used to be able to have sensible discussions about immigration. People right across the political spectrum had different views and it was fine. One of the most divisive things about brexit is that now anyone that thinks immigration should be controlled is suddenly labelled a racist and anyone that voted remain says we should open our borders to all 7bn people of the world even though they know that there has to be a limit somewhere. When it starts affecting them then I'm confident that their opinions will change.

I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street. When people moan about brexit voters being anti-immigration they don't get the fact that in their middle class suburban bubble they don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing. It makes areas less desirable to live which is bad for existing tenants. It's the opposite of gentrification, it creates slums instead. It has nothing to do with the EU but this is one of the reasons that those people are anti-immigration.
 
boromike85 said:
I don't think there are many people that are saying we shouldn't accept asylum seekers or refugees. The problem is people sailing here in dinghys from a safe country. It's dangerous and unnecessary because they are already in a safe country where they can seek asylum. Why would anyone defend this for any reason other than virtue signaling? I don't mean defend asylum seekers or how it enriches our culture, or it benefits us economically, I mean "Why is it acceptable that we have people fleeing a safe, civilised country to enter our country illegally?"

If they've already been denied by France then 100% we shouldn't be accepting them because France will have a similar criteria to us. Economic migrants shouldn't be treated as special cases just because they came by dinghy instead of plane. A dinghy from France and a dinghy from Syria are very different situations.

We used to be able to have sensible discussions about immigration. People right across the political spectrum had different views and it was fine. One of the most divisive things about brexit is that now anyone that thinks immigration should be controlled is suddenly labelled a racist and anyone that voted remain says we should open our borders to all 7bn people of the world even though they know that there has to be a limit somewhere. When it starts affecting them then I'm confident that their opinions will change.

I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street. When people moan about brexit voters being anti-immigration they don't get the fact that in their middle class suburban bubble they don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing. It makes areas less desirable to live which is bad for existing tenants. It's the opposite of gentrification, it creates slums instead. It has nothing to do with the EU but this is one of the reasons that those people are anti-immigration.
Click to expand...

"I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street."


".......in their middle class suburban bubble" [where do you live?]


"They don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing."


".............It makes areas less desirable to live"


"....it creates slums instead."

Emotive. Subjective. Labeling. Demeaning. Nonesence.
I`ve heard enough to understand some dress up prejudice and ignorance as fact - padded out with the sort of narrative I wouldnt wrap someone elses`s chips in.

Goodnight.
 
UKLL1981 said:
Nope but at the same time I wouldn’t risk my sons life by travelling through dozens of countries and across thousands of miles of land, borders and water. Is France not a safe country and does persecution and harm suddenly end when they cross the channel?

The more you take in, the more you help and the more you give shelter and aid to, then the more you will encourage to come here and the more will die trying to achieve it.

Anyone that chooses to travel through and leave safe countries like France in order to get to the U.K. is a economic migrant, this is illegal immigration that costs lives and only benefits criminals.

How many migrant camps do we have in this country? It’s the last stop and the holy grail for economic migrants. We aren’t returning them all and we aren’t housing them in camps like other countries so why do you think they keep trying to come here? If we did house them in camps like France they wouldn’t be so keen to risk their lives to get here. The only way you are going to stop people dying is to stop giving them the incentive to get to the U.K. by travelling half way round the world and leaving safe counties.
Click to expand...


Have you not heard of Yarl's Wood. We'd definitely have camps if the weather was nicer.
 
r00fie1 said:
"I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street."


".......in their middle class suburban bubble" [where do you live?]


"They don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing."


".............It makes areas less desirable to live"


"....it creates slums instead."

Emotive. Subjective. Labeling. Demeaning. Nonesence.
I`ve heard enough to understand some dress up prejudice and ignorance as fact - padded out with the sort of narrative I wouldnt wrap someone elses`s chips in.

Goodnight.
Click to expand...

Facts Roofie. Look at the list of the top 10 number of asylum seekers per capita. Spot a trend? I too llive in a middle class suburb and I am not affected by it in any way. Ask the locals that are what they think though. People with nothing with no way out added to already deprived areas does create slums. The people in those areas that do own their homes aren't going to be getting a boost in their house prices if they want to sell so they will be stuck in those slums.

I am in no way saying that any of the people housed there are anything but nice people but asylum seekers aren't here to work, they are here to escape persecution. They don't do much for lifting the economic output of an area.

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/middlesbrough-tops-league-number-asylum-10964217
 
boromike85 said:
I don't think there are many people that are saying we shouldn't accept asylum seekers or refugees. The problem is people sailing here in dinghys from a safe country. It's dangerous and unnecessary because they are already in a safe country where they can seek asylum. Why would anyone defend this for any reason other than virtue signaling? I don't mean defend asylum seekers or how it enriches our culture, or it benefits us economically, I mean "Why is it acceptable that we have people fleeing a safe, civilised country to enter our country illegally?"

If they've already been denied by France then 100% we shouldn't be accepting them because France will have a similar criteria to us. Economic migrants shouldn't be treated as special cases just because they came by dinghy instead of plane. A dinghy from France and a dinghy from Syria are very different situations.

We used to be able to have sensible discussions about immigration. People right across the political spectrum had different views and it was fine. One of the most divisive things about brexit is that now anyone that thinks immigration should be controlled is suddenly labelled a racist and anyone that voted remain says we should open our borders to all 7bn people of the world even though they know that there has to be a limit somewhere. When it starts affecting them then I'm confident that their opinions will change.

I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street. When people moan about brexit voters being anti-immigration they don't get the fact that in their middle class suburban bubble they don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing. It makes areas less desirable to live which is bad for existing tenants. It's the opposite of gentrification, it creates slums instead. It has nothing to do with the EU but this is one of the reasons that those people are anti-immigration.
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier today, some folks on here are desperately clinging on to their masks to stop them from slipping. If you voted for Brexit or if indeed you voted Conservative aka 'Get Brexit Done' then YOU now own the issue. So if you're not happy, make representations to your local Tory MP, or to Boris, or to Nigel, or to Tommy, or whoever else it is you adore and claim can do no wrong.
 
boromike85 said:
I don't think there are many people that are saying we shouldn't accept asylum seekers or refugees. The problem is people sailing here in dinghys from a safe country. It's dangerous and unnecessary because they are already in a safe country where they can seek asylum. Why would anyone defend this for any reason other than virtue signaling? I don't mean defend asylum seekers or how it enriches our culture, or it benefits us economically, I mean "Why is it acceptable that we have people fleeing a safe, civilised country to enter our country illegally?"

If they've already been denied by France then 100% we shouldn't be accepting them because France will have a similar criteria to us. Economic migrants shouldn't be treated as special cases just because they came by dinghy instead of plane. A dinghy from France and a dinghy from Syria are very different situations.

We used to be able to have sensible discussions about immigration. People right across the political spectrum had different views and it was fine. One of the most divisive things about brexit is that now anyone that thinks immigration should be controlled is suddenly labelled a racist and anyone that voted remain says we should open our borders to all 7bn people of the world even though they know that there has to be a limit somewhere. When it starts affecting them then I'm confident that their opinions will change.

I am certain that every one of the "let them all in brigade" would have a different opinion if all of the asylum seekers were housed in their street. When people moan about brexit voters being anti-immigration they don't get the fact that in their middle class suburban bubble they don't have to compete with asylum seekers for housing because they don't get housed in middle class suburbia, they are put in cheap houses in cheap areas where the locals already have nothing. It makes areas less desirable to live which is bad for existing tenants. It's the opposite of gentrification, it creates slums instead. It has nothing to do with the EU but this is one of the reasons that those people are anti-immigration.
Click to expand...

Again, none of this is the fault of the migrant, it is a government choice to do this. They scrimp and at every opportunity kick the littlest and rather than blame them people look for someone smaller to kick.

I know you're going to label me a middle class suburbanite - but I'm anything but and my road has people from Eritrea, India, France, Germany, the USA and.... Iraq and Syria living on it. And it's fantastic.
 
BoroFur said:
Like I said earlier today, some folks on here are desperately clinging on to their masks to stop them from slipping. If you voted for Brexit or if indeed you voted Conservative aka 'Get Brexit Done' then YOU now own the issue. So if you're not happy, make representations to your local Tory MP, or to Boris, or to Nigel, or to Tommy, or whoever else it is you adore and claim can do no wrong.
Click to expand...

Nothing to say on the first 3 paragraphs then? Only interested in the 4th because it hit too close to home by any chance?

Some people don't need masks. I am perfectly comfortable having a grown up discussion about why there should be controls on immigration. And also why refugees from France are not legitimate refugees.

I don't adore any of those people, thanks. I don't treat politics like football where I pick a side. I vote Labour and I voted brexit (like 1 in 3 other Labour voters did).
 
boromike85 said:
Nothing to say on the first 3 paragraphs then? Only interested in the 4th because it hit too close to home by any chance?

Some people don't need masks. I am perfectly comfortable having a grown up discussion about why there should be controls on immigration. And also why refugees from France are not legitimate refugees.

I don't adore any of those people, thanks. I don't treat politics like football where I pick a side. I vote Labour and I voted brexit (like 1 in 3 other Labour voters did).
Click to expand...
Did you vote Labour at the last election Mike?
They was a hell of a lot of brexiters who switched, putting a single issue above all else
 
jam69 said:
Did you vote Labour at the last election Mike?
They was a hell of a lot of brexiters who switched, putting a single issue above all else
Click to expand...

Yes. I want brexit but I still put looking after the NHS and society above that. Even more shocking, I think that brexit will benefit the people at the bottom more than the top (or the middle) because it is them that are disadvantaged most by excess immigration. Immigration is a good thing culturally and economically at the macro level, you will never hear me say otherwise. Some people benefit from it more than others and unfortunately it is big businesses that benefit most and workers that are negatively affected and those are the people that Labour are supposed to represent.

This isn't a topic about immigration though so don't really want to get sidetracked. It's a topic about why it is right or wrong for people from France to claim refuge in the UK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top